Two Fexofenadine Deep

There are few genres in the world of tabletop more recognizable than the take-that card game. Your Munchkins, your Fluxxes, your Exploding Kittens, what have you. The BGG crowd often dismisses these out of hand, but it’s worth remembering how much of the broader market these make up, and with good reason! They’re a wonderful environment for banter, an excuse to get rowdy with friends in person, the very reason a lot of folks put up with board games in the first place. When Atlas Games offered us a copy of Vicious Gardens for review, noting its crowdfunding success, I was excited to see what advancements had been made in a category I’ve spent a bit less time in over the last few years. My trip back was pleasant, and if anything that’s the biggest problem I have.

Stop me if you’ve heard this one before: Atlas has produced a gorgeous object. Between this, Godsforge, Dice Miner, and their long-running Gloom I’ve come to expect that, but VG‘s arguably on another level. Ross Bruggink outdid himself in every single piece, with lovely plants and Corporate Memphis-adjacent people subversively mangled in this world of jealous groundskeepers. The boards are equal parts functional and fashionable, the cardbacks in particular are lovely, and the central cards that everyone’s brawling over are lavishly illustrated on the fronts with clear functions detailed on their backs legible from across the table. Form and function are balanced perfectly here.

Mechanically this is a hybrid set collection and friend-walloper, the percentage of either being determined by the players themselves. These functions exist in wholly separate decks and refilling your hand is done in whatever combination you please, potentially putting a target on your back if you lean too much into either but hamstringing your effectiveness if you try to ride the line. Turns are loosey-goosey affairs, letting you pot plants and heap harm in whatever order is best before drawing up, giving you time to stare at your hand and contemplate your next move as your friends inevitably undo at least some of your progress.

I don’t intend to dwell on this long, but those for whom that last sentence sounds painful need not apply. Nothing about Vicious Gardens will change a care bear’s mind. This is a game about making as much progress as possible whilst your friends play crabs in a bucket, yanking you down in perfect position to do a little yanking yourself later on. I do quite like that the specialists demand you sacrifice plants from your garden in order to sic them on your opponents, but given that they’re almost always profitable that feels more like a mild pre-req than any true cost. You are going to be able to swing fairly freely in the 20-30 minutes you spend with any given game of VG, and you need to make your peace with getting punched 3 times between swings of your own.

It’s not the violence I take issue with, it’s all the time spent on things other than violence. Digging through the deck to assemble sets is just dull, and the win condition being turning in recipes for 1 of 2 available point cards sees you constantly taking aim at a moving target with randomized ammunition. You can’t control what plants you draw, nor can you the goal requirements, and no recipe costing more than 6 plants means it’s not uncommon to have someone claim a prize, reveal a new one, and watch as the next player immediately snatches that one with plants they already had. You could easily play your turns without having looked at the table between them, and in a game that prioritizes interaction this feels counter-intuitive. It’s rarely a good sign when the fun part of the design doesn’t work towards a win condition, and that’s not strictly true in VG as playing specialists is the go-to when a score isn’t immediately possible, but even then you’d be forgiven for saving as many plants as possible for a rainy day VS hoping that the deck’s effects can make a key steal when your turn rolls around. To put it succinctly: VG always makes it possible to move the game forward, but does so at the cost of its attacks’ impact ever really being felt.

The game feels too reserved, afraid to fully let players loose on each other without peace bonding their sheers first. Plenty of effects are more mild setback than anything especially severe or turn-ruining, especially when compared to some of its peers. I found myself fondly remembering Monopoly Deal in particular, a game that balances set collection and spicy effects just a bit better. It lacks VG‘s grand presentation, but it takes just as long and fits in your pocket, making it a far easier pick for a hand at the cafe or hitching a ride in a day bag, waiting for the right opportunity. Vicious Gardens is not that game, it doesn’t try to be, but it builds upon that mechanical and production foundation, with each additional rule and inch of table space only leading to its juice being a few more squeezes away for casual audiences than I’d like.

In straddling the line between light fare and combat sport, Vicious Gardens doesn’t quite feel like the best version of itself. I find it perfectly playable, would happily join in if asked, and could see folks who aren’t unreasonably obsessed with board games being plenty satisfied with it both as an object and an experience, but my needs differ and my tastes are extreme. Consider me the type to chug a bottle of hot sauce for sport, but in cardboard form. I’m at the point in my board gaming where I either crave social-first spectacles or high-interaction games that demand everyone’s full attention, and VG, while pleasant, doesn’t quite manage to achieve either. Both of these issues could be overcome were it sufficiently mean and by extension funny, but that’s more Gloom‘s territory, with its focus on storytelling and comically grim setting selling the full impact of its take-that. While Vicious Gardens‘ blooms are as lovely as its thorns are numerous, in the end they can’t quite pierce the glove.

5/10

Review copy provided by publisher.